Legal Opinion

Watkins v. Clemmer

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 11, 1933No. Docket No. 8702PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

This, the first of these appeals, is taken upon the judgment-roll. The appellant sued the respondent upon an account stated for $1500, based upon surgical services rendered to respondent’s minor son. The court held that the statement of an account had not been established, and found, among other facts, the following: In 1920 the respondent and Bernice Clemmer were divorced; the custody of their son, John, was awarded to Mrs. Clemmer and the respondent was ordered to pay $20 a month for the boy’s support, and later $35, which he has since paid. Mrs. Clemmer remarried and is now Mrs.…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Lewis v. LewisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
  2. McLaren v. HallSupreme Court of Iowa · 1868
  3. Schultz v. McLeanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  4. Dixon v. DixonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  5. Puget Sound Lumber Co. v. KrugCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Rosher v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Burge v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Horr v. CattaliniCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
  4. State Ex Rel. Weingart v. KiessenbeckOregon Supreme Court · 1941
  5. Fagan v. FaganCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API